>
>
> MER WEEKEND READING:
>
>                  EXPOSING ISRAEL'S ORIGINAL SINS
>
>                          By Gideon Levy
>
>                "Correcting a Mistake - Jews and Arabs
>                in Palestine/Israel, 1936-1956," by
>                Benny Morris, Am Oved Publishers,
>                241 pages, NIS 64
>
>
> Oh, we were so good (and did so many bad things). We were so right (and
> caused so many injustices). We were so beautiful (and our actions resulted
> in so much ugliness). And oh, we were so innocent and spread so many
lies -
> lies and half-truths that we told ourselves and the rest of the world.We,
> who were born afterward, weren't told the whole truth; they only taught us
> the good parts, of which there were many. But, after all, there were also
> dark chapters which we heard nothing about. Instead, we were fed lies -
> there's just no other word for it.
>
> They lied when they told us that the Arabs of Lod and Ramle "asked to
leave
> their cities" (the head of the history department of the Israel Defense
> Forces). They lied when they told us that the murderous Kibiya operation
was
> carried out by "enraged residents" (David Ben-Gurion). They lied when they
> told us that all the "infiltrators" were bloodthirsty terrorists, that all
> the Arab states wanted to destroy us and that we were the only ones who
> simply wanted peace all the time.
>
> They lied; oh, how they lied. We didn't hear a thing about the horrific
> massacre in Safsaf; and not a syllable was uttered about the deportation
> plans.
>
> The Arabs were always the bad guys. We were the absolute righteous, or the
> exclusive victims - or so we were told. Perhaps they didn't want to spoil
it
> for us; perhaps they didn't want to ruin it for themselves. The huge
> celebration of a nation without a country that came to a country without a
> nation, settled it, caused its barren wilderness to blossom and
established
> a glorious state - with exemplary, impeccable morality - should have been
> complete. As large, true and deserving as it may be, however, this
> celebration cannot be complete without recounting its entire history.
> Historical mud-slinging
> The time for telling the whole truth is well upon us. Over the past 12
years
> or so - and much to the distress of the "old" historians, whose
enterprises
> are developing cracks - a number of "new" historians have taken up the
> challenge.
>
> The rage with which the old historians are responding to the new
historical
> enterprise is, perhaps, the entire story: If they had questioned their
> truths, which are beginning to crumble before their denying, repressive
> eyes, it is doubtful whether they would be so angry. After all, if they
are
> so sure of themselves, why are they reacting so vociferously and making
such
> a fuss? History, as the saying goes, will be the judge ... won't it?
>
> As the doubts begin to surface, with Yitzhak Rabin, the banisher of the
> Arabs of Lod and Ramle, admitting his deeds even before the historian who
> tried to ignore and cover them up did, it is easy to understand the
> mud-slinging campaign that the old historians are waging against their new
> colleagues. With nowhere else to turn, this is their last resort. With no
> other sanctuary available, patriotism, as per usual, becomes the safe
> harbor.
>
> Benny Morris certainly has a large stake in the new historical enterprise,
> even if it would have been better if he had let others determine that,
"The
> turning point ... came in 1988, heralded, inter alia, in the first article
> in this compilation" (page 12). Morris' two earlier books - "Israel's
Border
> Wars, 1949-1956: Arab Infiltration, Israeli Retaliation and the Countdown
to
> the Suez War" (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993), and "The Birth of the
> Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1948" (Cambridge Middle East Library,
> 1987) - are foundations for an understanding of the roots of the
> Israeli-Arab conflict.
>
> If you want to understand the Palestinian uprising in the territories, go
to
> these two books. If you want to understand why a settlement is impossible
> without a solution to the refugee problem, go to Morris. All the
> early-warning signs appear in his works. They show how our relationship
with
> the Arabs began. Everything that followed, up until this very day, is
> anchored in their - and particularly our - original sins, which Morris and
> his colleagues have exposed.
>
> Don't get me wrong. Among his colleagues, the new historians, Morris is
> certainly the least political and most Zionistic. His name doesn't appear
on
> the protest petitions of the extreme left, and he defines himself as a
> Zionist, without reservations. He is more concerned with his historical
> findings than he is with their political and moral implications.
Sometimes,
> his findings appear to cause him a certain discomfort, but you won't catch
> him voicing unequivocal moral assessments of his revelations, as chilling
as
> they may be, particularly not to anyone who didn't know an Avraham (or
> Ibrahim) of those days.
>
> He hasn't written ideological articles either. As assiduous a researcher,
> and as hard-working an in-the-field reporter (Morris began his
professional
> life as a journalist) as he was, he presents the story and leaves us to
draw
> most of the conclusions.
>
> Morris' conclusions, one can safely assume, are a lot more forgiving than
> one would expect, and in this, lies his strength: Despite the claims
leveled
> against the new historians, Morris does not home in on a target before
> embarking on his research. Neither does he hesitate to present findings
that
> contradict or weaken his basic theories. For Morris, the experience
> determines the consciousness, and not vice-versa. A small ideologist and a
> significant historian - that's Morris in a nutshell.
>
> His new book, "Correcting a Mistake," is a collection of articles that
come
> together to form a gripping, infuriating collage of injustices committed
> between 1936-1956 by the Jewish community of Palestine, and thereafter,
the
> state, against the native Palestinians.
>
>          No contrition
>
> This time, in contrast to his other books, Morris doesn't focus on one
> particular issue. Contrary to the connotations stemming from the name of
the
> book, this is not an expression of contrition. Morris doesn't present new
> findings to sweeten the previous bitter pills he asked us to swallow.
Quite
> the opposite: Regrettably, the opening of the archives, which had been
> closed for some 50 years, and the exposure of new material has shed more
> light on the picture, which Morris had painted, in shadow, and which now,
> stirs up more fury than he first imagined.
>
> "The Deportations of the Hiram Operation: Correcting a Mistake" is the
title
> of the article from which the collection takes its name. "Sometimes a
> historian must correct a mistake," Morris writes, and the reader is
riveted.
> Perhaps it never happened? Perhaps there were no deportations or
massacres?
> Perhaps Morris was wrong and everything was done by the book?
>
> Not a chance! Over a decade after the publication of "The Birth of the
> Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1948," Morris reveals that he did,
indeed,
> make a mistake, but errors and omissions accepted. He believed Major
General
> (res.) Moshe Carmel and other sources, who told him that no deportation
> orders were issued during the course of Operation Hiram, to be the
dirtiest
> there was.
>
> And now, the IDF archives have been opened and there we find a cable dated
> October 31, 1948, signed by Major General Carmel and addressed to all the
> division and district commanders under his command: "Do all you can to
> immediately and quickly purge the conquered territories of all hostile
> elements in accordance with the orders issued. The residents should be
> helped to leave the areas that have been conquered."
>
> Perhaps this was the right thing to do; perhaps there was no alternative.
> But why lie all these years? Why didn't they say: "Righteousness
encountered
> righteousness; a victim encountered a victim; and this was the inevitable
> result. We had to deport them. It was either them or us." It's a lot more
> convincing than lying about it. The only thing is, Carmel's deportation
> order isn't the whole truth which Morris reveals in "Correcting a
Mistake."
>
> Apparently, Carmel's troops carried out massacres in no less than 10 (!)
> villages in the north of the country. They would gather the men of these
> villages in the square, choose a few of them, sometimes dozens, stand them
> up against a wall and shoot them. Because the IDF has kept the relevant
> document under wraps, we know nothing about these massacres. We can only
> hope that this nonsense, this outrageous practice of keeping things
> confidential, passes from the world and that 52 years on, we will
eventually
> learn everything - where we went wrong and the evil things we did.
>
>        Blood-chilling testimonies
>
> In any event, Morris presents a number of blood-chilling testimonies,
first
> hand, about the massacres carried out during Operation Hiram, the numbers
of
> which are different to and far more serious than any other operation. No,
he
> doesn't say that Carmel ordered the massacres; who knows, perhaps there's
> another confidential document that does, and Morris will have to correct
> another mistake. But, he deduces - based on the large number of incidents
in
> this particular operation, their similar nature, and the fact that no one
> was punished in their wake - that the commanders understood Carmel's
orders
> to be a stamp of approval for acts of murder that would make the residents
> of the villages flee.
>
> Up until a short while ago, one could have run into the pleasant-mannered
> Carmel, who served as a government minister on behalf of the now-defunct
> Achdut Ha'avoda and Ma'arach parties, sitting in the Beit Ariella
municipal
> library in Tel Aviv, seven days a week, and browsing through the
newspapers
> like one of the pensioners. He was also among the very good people who did
a
> number of very bad things.
>
> Terrible things were done after the War of Independence, too; for example,
> in the town of Majdal in 1950. At that stage, Israel was already quite
sure
> of itself - big, but not big enough, as far as it was concerned.
>
> Some 10,000 Palestinians lived in Majdal before the war and, in October
> 1948, thousands more refugees from nearby villages joined them. Majdal
fell
> in November and most of its residents and refugees fled wherever they
could,
> leaving some 3,000 inhabitants, mostly women and the elderly. Orders in
> Hebrew and Yiddish were posted in the streets of the town, warning the
> soldiers to be aware of "undesirable" behavior on the part of the town's
> residents. "As was customary in such instances," the Israeli intelligence
> officer wrote, "the behavior of the population was obsequious and
> adulatory."
>
> Majdal was too close to Gaza for Israel's liking. In December 1948, IDF
> soldiers "swept through" the town and deported some 500 of its remaining
> inhabitants. In 1949, Yigal Allon demanded "to transfer all the Arab
> inhabitants." Ben- Gurion objected. An inter-ministerial committee for the
> "transfer of Arabs from place to place" - yes, we had one of those as
well -
> decided to thin out the population somewhat; another ministerial
committee -
> "on abandoned property" - decided to settle Majdal with Jews.
>
> >From committee to committee, Majdal was "Judaized," until, with 2,500
Jewish
> residents, it became known as Migdal-Ad.
>
> In December 1949, more Arabs were deported so as to vacate a few more
houses
> - "abandoned property" - for a few more discharged soldiers. The IDF made
> the life of those Arab who remained a misery, hoping they'd get the
message.
> The new commanding officer of the Southern Command, Moshe Dayan, rekindled
> the ideas of his predecessor, Yigal Allon.
>
> "I hope that perhaps in the coming years, there will be another
opportunity
> to transfer these Arabs [170,000 Israeli Arabs - G.L.] out of the Land of
> Israel," he said at a meeting of the Mapai faction, outlining its ideas
> while in uniform. Dayan backed up his words with actions: He submitted a
> detailed proposal for "the evacuation of the Arab inhabitants of the town
of
> Majdal." The chief of staff agreed and Ben-Gurion authorized the plan. The
> government was circumvented, the Histadrut labor federation objected, and
> Rabin informed the residents.
>
> The transfer began at the beginning of 1950, although the "official
> operation" took off in June. There were still those who spoke of
dispersing
> the Arabs around the country; in the end, they were deported to Gaza. They
> were loaded onto trucks and dropped off at the border - "deliveries," as
> they were termed. Just to remind you again, the state already existed. The
> last delivery of 229 people left for Gaza on October 21; the Egyptians
> didn't bat an eyelid.
>
> Back in Israel, the officials pondered over how to distribute the
> "abandoned" houses, most of which went to individuals who had some
political
> clout. In 1956, Migdal-Ad changed its name to Ashkelon. To this very day,
> the former residents of Majdal live in the shacks and shanties of the
> refugee camps in Gaza.
>
> How many Israelis know this story? How many have heard it before? How many
> have ever thought of the refugees on whose destroyed homes the city of
> Ashkelon was founded?
>
>            'Tearful assassin'
>
> But the most enlightening and probably most significant document presented
> in the book is the journal of concerned-citizen Yosef Nachmani, perhaps
the
> original tearful assassin, certainly not the last.
>
> For 40 years, Nachmani spearheaded the Zionist enterprise in the Land of
> Israel - a high-ranking member of the pre-independence underground,
Haganah;
> the director of the offices of the Jewish National Fund in Tiberias; and
the
> man responsible for purchasing and settling land throughout the Galilee
and
> Jezreel Valley regions.
>
> Nachmani's beliefs underwent numerous upheavals all through his life: At
> first, he supported the transfer; then, he sobered up. At first, he was in
> favor of adopting a harsh approach; then, his conscience started eating
away
> at him. At first, he dispossessed; then, he denounced. At first, he fired;
> then, he cried.
>
> But above all, he was a fascinating observer. At least one particular
> portion of his journal requires repeating here: " ... the acts of cruelty
> committed by our soldiers. After they went into Safsaf, the village and
its
> people raised a white flag. They separated the men from the women, tied
the
> hands of some 50 to 60 peasants and shot and killed them, burying them in
a
> single hole. They also raped a number of the women from the village.
> Alongside the wood, he [probably an eye-witness by the name of Freedman -
> G.L.] saw a few dead women, among them one who was holding her dead child
in
> her arms ...
>
> "In Salha, which raised a white flag, they carried out a real massacre,
> killing men and women, about 60 to 70 people. Where did they find such a
> degree of cruelty like that of the Nazis? They learned from them."
>
> Bosnia? Kosovo? Chechniya? Rwanda? No, not at all; right here, and not
that
> long ago.
>
> Morris, as calculated as ever, concludes: "The fundamental change in the
> thoughts and actions of Nachmani between 1947-1949 leaves the observer
with
> a sense of paradox and admiration and gives him a key to understanding
> Zionism and its success. Zionism has always had two faces: a constructive,
> moral, compromising and considerate aspect; and a destructive, selfish,
> militant, chauvinistic-racist one. Both are sincere and real ... The
> simultaneous existence of these two facets was one of the most significant
> keys to the success of Zionism" - shooting and weeping.
>
> But, there were also incidents in which they shot - oh, and how they
shot -
> and didn't weep at all. And lied. This is the picture that emerges from
the
> chapter about the Israeli press at the time of the Kibiya affair, which
> expresses the dark side of the then already five-year-old state: no longer
a
> community struggling to establish a country, but an orderly, victorious
> state, thought of as a democracy, with David Ben-Gurion, who lies,
> poker-faced, and its press, which brazenly conceals scandalous information
> from its readers and even lies knowingly - all for the glory of the State
of
> Israel.
>
> "First of all, the facts," as Morris writes. On the night of October
12-13,
> 1953, a group of infiltrators crossed the border into Israel, reached
Yehud
> and threw a grenade into the home of the Kanias family. The mother and her
> two young children were killed. Retribution was two days in coming:
Soldiers
> from the IDF commando unit (Unit 101) raided Kibiya, going from house to
> house, throwing in grenades and shooting indiscriminately. The result: 60
> dead, most of them women and children.
>
> The Israeli leaders did not make mention of most of these facts to the
> public, but worse still - a thousands times worse - neither did the
Israeli
> press. The Mapai newspaper, Ha'dor, tried, at first, not to refrain from
> reporting a thing about the massacre; the other newspapers offered partial
> and even blatantly false versions of the story.
>
> Morris, on the article in Ma'ariv by the legendary Azriel Carlibach:
"There
> is hardly one sentence among Carlibach's words that does not defile,
distort
> or twist the truth, either explicitly or implicitly; whereas the words of
> Radio Ramallah, as quoted in the Hebrew press, were almost all the simple
> truth."
>
> Most of the press - aside from Kol Ha'am, and later Ha'aretz and Al
> Hamishmar, all of which expressed reservations - reported that the Kibiya
> killers weren't IDF conscripts, but rather outraged residents that went
out
> to seek vengeance. Unit 101 or outraged residents? The press and then
prime
> minister David Ben-Gurion knew, Morris writes, that this was a
> propaganda-like lie.
>
> I read this chapter twice - once, before the outbreak of the "Al-Aqsa
> Intifada"; and then again, a short while thereafter. After my first
reading,
> I was incensed by the Israeli press of old - a collaborator and
distorter -
> and I took pride in the long way it has come since then.
>
> After my second reading, and in the wake of the way in which the new
> Intifada has been covered by sections of the Israeli media, I was faced
with
> the following question: Have we really changed, or perhaps, in testing
> times, does the Israeli press return to its bad old place of being the
> state's trumpet, just as it was in Kibiya, just as Morris describes? Then,
> the press inflamed passions by giving prominence to the Israeli victims
> (relatively few) and playing down the Arab ones (tenfold more), greatly
> enhancing the Israelis' sense of being the victim, the exclusive
sufferers.
>
> So, is there anything new under the sun?
>
> The things that Morris writes about the Kibiya press hold true, in part,
for
> the press of the past few days: "As a whole, the press approached the
Kibiya
> operation as an enlisted press, justifying, no matter what, government
> policy and the actions of the IDF ... The feeling was that if the entire
> world was denouncing [Israel], then the press here must unite, to beautify
> and repel the criticism."
>
> Some things never change.
>
> Isn't it best for us to know about all these things? Isn't it important
for
> us to know about all these things, particularly now, in such difficult
> times? That's where it all started. That's how it all began
>
> Ha'aretz � - 3 November 2000
>




_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist

Reply via email to